There are important studies that have directly focused on how, in times of conflict, it is possible for previously law abiding people to commit the most atrocious acts of cruelty and violence. The work of Erich Fromm (Escape from Freedom), Hannah Arendt (Eichmann in Jerusalem), Zygmunt Bauman (Modernity and the Holocaust) and Ernest Becker (Escape from Evil) have all contemplated the driving force of aggression and mass violence to further our understanding of how people are capable of engaging in extreme forms of cruelty and violence. This paper specifically addresses these issues by focusing on C. P. Taylor’s play Good. This provocative play examines how a seemingly ‘good’ and intelligent university professor can gradually become caught up in the workings of the Third Reich. Taylor highlights the importance of appreciating how people can be steadily incorporated into an ideologically destructive system. I argue that the theatre is a powerful medium to explore these complex issues. The audience of Good find themselves confronted with the following question—‘What would you have done?’

The relationship between whistleblowing and directors’ duties is not straightforward. Directors’ core duties (duty of care, duties to act in good faith in the interests of the company and for proper purposes, and duties to avoid unauthorised conflicts and profits) are owed to the company and not directly to whistleblowers or employees. On the other hand, a company’s reputation is a key factor in its success and one that is increasingly recognised in the application of the duty to act in good faith in the interests of the company and, more recently, in the application of the duty of care. Corporate codes may also contain material concerning whistleblowing, and a question arises as to how binding these codes are and the consequences of non-compliance. This chapter explores the interaction between whistleblowing and directors’ core duties, as well as the potential implications of non-compliance with whistleblowing provisions in corporate codes by companies and directors. The analysis relates primarily to Australian law, but comparison is made with other Commonwealth jurisdictions.

This book taps into two main streams of the economic analysis of law and advances the proposition that cloud computingCloud computing
architecturesArchitecture
will benefit from making use of both strands of thoughts. The purpose is to take some of the key tenets of the traditional school of law and economicsLaw and economics
, but give greater weight to the new behavioral insights within the reach of cloud computingCloud computing
and Big DataBig data
transformations.

In the 2030 Agenda governments committed to a revitalized Global Partnership between States and declared that public finance has to play a vital role in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). But in recent decades, the combination of neoliberal ideology, corporate lobbying, business-friendly fiscal policies, tax avoidance and tax evasion has led to a massive weakening of the public sector and its ability to provide essential goods and services and to fulfill its human rights obligations. The same corporate strategies and fiscal and regulatory policies that led to this weakening have enabled an unprecedented accumulation of individual wealth and increasing market concentration. The proponents of privatization and public-private partnerships (PPPs) use these trends to present the private sector as the most efficient way to provide the necessary means for implementing the SDGs. But many studies and experiences by affected communities have shown that privatization and PPPs involve disproportionate risks and costs for the public sector and can even exacerbate inequalities, decrease equitable access to essential services and jeopardize the fulfilment of human rights. Therefore, it is high time to counter these trends, reclaim public policy space and take bold measures to strengthen public finance, rethink PPPs and weaken the grip of corporate power on people’s lives.